“I support what they are doing, but we have never got rid of him,” said the former HuffPost UK minister: “I support what they are doing, but we have never got rid of him,”
The veteran deputy was specifically talking about the Labor Party’s plans to reduce 6 billion pounds from the social welfare bill, whose details will be determined next Tuesday by the Minister of Labor and Pensions Liz Kendall.
However, he could also talk about Keir Starmer’s decision to the cabinet of the international development budget to enhance defense spending, or even remove winter fuel payments from 10 million retirees.
All three policies are very controversial, but also noticeable for the fact that none of them was in the Labor Party elections.
The British may have voted for change when they handed Kiir Starmer the majority of the landslide, but they had no idea what this would look like.
However, the source of Douning Street was not a non -regret – and insisted that the Prime Minister would not back down, regardless of criticism raining on No. 10.
““Everything flows down from the economy. If we will make people better in first -class public services, we need to re -connect the economy,” the source said to HuffPost UK.
“You cannot have an increasing and effective modern economy as one in every eight young people are unemployed, or that NHS waiting lists are 7 million.”
The main factor behind the discounts is the fact that the spare room of 10 billion pounds sterling – the Capital Hall in Treasury Terminology – which Chancellor Rachel Reeves believed would have now disappeared in the last fall budget.
With the luxury bill in its course to the top 100 billion pounds by the end of the contract, it firmly in Crosshairs for Reeves while preparing to deliver its spring statement to Parliament on March 26.
But source No. 10 insisted:Whether we have 10 pounds or 10 billion pounds, we will continue to do these things because we must get the leadership of the economy. In the end, everything is for a greater purpose. “
It is understood that the package will include global credit changes, which will witness the amount paid for those who are considered very sick at work.
Personal independence payments (PIP), which aims to help the disabled with the cost of things like wheelchairs, which means that the real conditions reduce income for some of the most vulnerable people in the country.
“No Labor Party deputies came to politics to do so.”
It is the last change that causes special anger among the work deputies, including some cabinet members.
Dozens are believed to be ready to vote against changes when they come in general, with ministerial resignations also the possibility of what could be the greatest challenge of the Prime Minister’s authority since the elections.
One of the rebels said: “People are terrified of the idea that PIP may not increase with inflation. Representatives of the Labor Party in their electoral surgeries see many people on PIP, and greatly affects people emotionally.
“Initially I thought that talking about the rebels” reached 80 “was more appreciated, but now I think you might talk about something in that area. This is before the pressure really builds from our voters.”
Downg Street invites groups of work deputies to No. 10 to talk to them through government plans, but one of the attendees described it as “chaotic” as explaining their angry fears.
One of them said: “People not only go there and are informed of what will happen, they challenge what they are told.” “The fact that the Downing Street holds these meetings at all show their concern.
“Opposition this goes beyond the left of the party. People are morally insulting. No Labor Party deputies came to politics to do so.”
An ally of the prime minister told the Prime Minister: “It is the most difficult thing we had to do this parliament, and we do not go into a lightness, but we have to do so.
“There is no alternative but system reform. The principles behind this revolve around supporters who can work to return to work while protecting those who really need support.
“We have thought for a long and difficult period about the shape of the package, but in the end, between Rachel and Les and Kiir, we think this is the best way to do this.”
But Luke Trail from More common denominators Think-THnks said that Starmer risks “dividing the Labor Party coalition” by cutting the advantages of the deficit.
He said: “There is an intellectual school that revolves around” We must see that we are difficult “and there is some attractiveness for some voters.
“But in reality when you focus on the idea of cutting the advantages of deficit, this is less popular. I will run it more than helping those working in working instead of being in particular. Caring for the weak is a basic British feature.”
Chris Hopkins, director of political research in opinion polls SavantaHuffPost UK said: “The audience rates say that government spending on well -being is very high.
“But on an equal footing, there will be many potential workers voters who can feel the picker of any luxury repairs, and it will be the one that might motivate many Backbench’s business representatives to oppose the plans.”
Activists make their opposition to luxury discounts.
An open message to the consultant warned of 16 charities from charitable societies of “catastrophic influence” of what the government wants to do.
“We agree with the government’s ambition to support more disabled people,” charities said. “However, making discounts to the advantages of deficit will not achieve this goal or repair the system. In fact, there is little evidence indicating increased benefits increasing the results of employment.
“We know that the benefits system is broken and needs to be repaired. There are people with disabilities outside the work who want to work in view of the right support. For some disabled people, work is inappropriate. Changes in social welfare must begin here. Not with discounts.”
Louise Murphy, senior economists in Decision Corporation Al -Khanji urged the ministers to “move forward with caution instead of rushing to find savings that could bring in reverse results.”
She said: “The ministers need to focus on a long -term change and provide the logical basis that focuses on those demanding reform, such as the reason for changing support levels.
“The current approach is very similar to an exercise to provide costs that risk hitting living standards and undermining the belief in the system of benefits.”
Despite the fierce opposition to government plans, the Prime Minister and the advisor are determined to force them.
The amount of long -term damage caused by the incurred fire that they will undoubtedly maintain remains. It must be seen